Santorum "Suspends" Primary Campaign for President.

[A-1]

Gee,

Is there ANYBODY who Romney can get who will help his campaign? Maybe that lanky female attorney with the big mouth. What's her name? Ann something or the other?

ANYBODY?, ANYBODY?, ANYBODY?

Maybe he OUGHT to draft THIS GUY or somebody like him to deal with the Tea Party and to organize the various Republican factions.

He is unknown and his UNBRIDLED CONSERVATISM would surely convalesce the Republican Party into a viable competitor.

Choosing somebody known and moderate will cause the Tea Party to run a 3rd candidate who will split the Republicans causing Mitt to lose.

If he can convince a conservative choice to lay low and to rely on a conservative record he may have a chance to rally the Republicans. Then, he could manufacture weaknesses for Obama through the various propaganda news services, Fox, Rush Lint-ball and others...

Bob/3, what DO you think, and please, no more RASPUTIN polls from the Dark Side...

[bobover3]

So far, we've only considered professional politicians. Romney himself has had only a modest career in politics, and I could imagine him naming someone of distinction from outside politics. It's been done plenty of times before, especially with military men like Powell or Eisenhower, or an academic like Wilson. Anyone with significant experience of leadership, especially of a large organization might be good.

I'm happy to see how ruthless Romney is because he'll need it to fight the equally ruthless Obama campaign. The President himself has taken to telling outrageous lies about Republicans. His lies are so many and so mean-spirited as almost to constitute an alternative universe to the one in which we live. Romney will need every scrap of cunning to fight back. An honest debate on the merits of competing political philosophies might be won by whoever is most persuasive or has the better ideas, but the President has already declared himself ready to damn Republicans as baby eaters and ask voters to save the babies by voting for him. There's no winning such a fight except by returning fire.

[A-1]

Thanks, Bob/3!

Having commentary from Bob/3 brings this race between the mainstream Democrats and Republicans into perspective. I will agree with him that this race has the potential to get ugly.

However, I don't see Obama with cloven hooves and a tail, neither do I see Romney as completely a ruthless person.

Although Both of them WILL be demonized by their opposition, I fear. It will all be exaggeration. As we saw with the first Obama campaign stirring crowds into unreasonable fury will not necessarily bring on a win. It did not bring on a win for McCain and Palin, and it could be that a backlash to that sort of campaign does not bode well for it's author.

Heck, I have even eaten a babe or two in my day... However, One must be cautious of those devils with the blue dress on. Look what one did to Bill Clinton. When one considers the political angle it is best to avoid being eaten and also getting caught with your mouth full.

[curious_guy]

I think Romney's ideal choice for vice president would be an very conservative evangelist Mexican-American woman who is not stupid. (Are there any evangelists who are not stupid?)

[hazbalz]

I'm happy to see how ruthless Romney is because he'll need it to fight the equally ruthless Obama campaign. The President himself has taken to telling outrageous lies about Republicans. His lies are so many and so mean-spirited as almost to constitute an alternative universe to the one in which we live.

Gee, Bob. Mind quoting one of those "outrageous lies about Republicans" that the President has told? Since you said there were so many I'm certain you should be able to support your assertion. In the meantime check this out when it comes to telling lies. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM9DVC7kd7s

[Dave]

... Romney will need every scrap of cunning to fight back. An honest debate on the merits of competing political philosophies might be won by whoever is most persuasive or has the better ideas, but ....

First there is 78 or 81 card carrying COMMUNISTS in the Progressive Caucus as per Allen West, one of the rising young stars in the Republican party braintrust...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,1232324.story
Tuesday night at a town hall meeting in Jensen Beach, Fla., one of West’s constituents asked him how many “card-carrying Marxists or international socialists” there were in Congress. Without hesitation, Allen responded, “I believe there’s about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party.”
He went on to identify them as the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a group within the Democratic caucus that wants to end corporate welfare for oil, gas and coal companies, rebuild the country’s infrastructure, expedite an end to the war in Afghanistan and eliminate tax cuts for the top 2% of Americans while extending tax relief for the middle class. Now, that may not sound like communism to you, but to West, such scary ideas apparently reek of Bolshevism. (Note to Rep. West: solid majorities of voters tell pollsters they support every one of those proposals -- the commies have already won!)

ANd the ever dignified millionaire/billionaire supporter of republicans hoping that the president's teleprompters are bulletproof... a real dignified argument if I ever heard one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...l?ref=politics
Wealthy GOP super PAC donor Foster Friess, fresh off announcing a conversion from Rick Santorum's corner to Mitt Romney's, drew a little unwanted attention Wednesday when he used gun imagery to weigh in on the shifting state of the 2012 race.
"There are a lot of things that haven't been hammered at because Rick and Mitt have been going at each other," Friess said during an interview on Fox Business News. "Now that they have trained their barrels on President Obama, I hope his teleprompters are bulletproof."
He quickly went on to admit that he "probably shouldn't have said that."
It's not the first time Friess has created controversy during a media appearance.
In February, then a top surrogate for Santorum, Friess spoke with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell about what he described as the triviality of the contraception debate.
"This contraceptive thing, my gosh it's such [sic] inexpensive. Back in my days, they used Bayer Aspirin for contraception. The gals put it between their knees and it wasn't that costly," he said.
He later apologized for the failed "joke."

But of course in the republican mind, these two are brilliant scholars and high-minded angels in the fight against the antichrist and the efforts to establish a Christian United States of Theocratic Evangelism and rewrite the Constitution to what the Founding Fathers really intended -- to reestablish the British monarchy in the Thirteen colonies...

With those two scraps of cunning (West and Fries) added to Herman Cain, Sarah Palin and Donald Trump (the all-stars brains and living gods of the republican party) we have a fight on our hands of epic struggle worthy of only the brick shithouse on the corner lot. I sometimes think that Romney is the head chimpanzee in the Monkey House slinging shit and feces at the patrons of the zoo... That's the republican "scraps of cunning" ...

[Mac]

River this thread has de-generated into one sided mud slinging. In line with your policy it should be closed.

[kristoff]

River this thread has de-generated into one sided mud slinging. In line with your policy it should be closed.

Actually, I think it is fairly tame and polite compared to some I've seen.

[A-1]

River this thread has de-generated into one sided mud slinging. In line with your policy it should be closed.

Pity the "POOR?" Republicans...

Actually, I think it is fairly tame and polite compared to some I've seen.

It is ELECTION DAY in America, folks...

Welcome to the NEW Primate section where people act more like people than do the other primates. (Not mention chimps, orangutans, baboons and spider monkeys.)

Darwin's Mistake

Three monkeys sat on a coconut tree,
Discussing things as they're said to be;
Said one to the others, "Now listen, you two
There's a certain rumor that can't be true
That man descended from our noble race;
The very idea is a big disgrace.

No monkey ever deserted his wife,
Starved her babies and ruined her life;
And you've never known a mother-monk
To leave her babies with others to bunk,
Or pass them on from one to another
Till they scarcely know who was their mother;

And another thing you'll never see,
A monk building a fence around a coconut tree
And let the coconuts go to waste
Forbidding all other monks to taste;
Why, if I'd put a fence round the tree
Starvation would force you to steal from me;

Here's another thing a monk won't do
Go out at night and get on the stew
Or use a gun or club or knife
To take some other monkey's life;

Yes, man descended — with all his fuss,
But, brothers, he didn't descend from us!"

[Riverwind]

If you don't think its fare now what until the super pac's get going, there will be a billion dollars on each side, this will be the worst election in the history of this country thanks to the republican court. So if you like it you have only yourselves to blame.

So far this thread has been tame, I will keep an eye on all of them and in the mood I am in it better stay tame on all the threads.

You all have been warned.

River

[Cainanite]

I'm in Canada. It is still... what 200 days to the US election, and I am already overloaded by the negativity I see coming out the USA. Yiikes!

I know it is gonna get worse. I'm morbidly interested in just how much worse it's going to get. I'm craning my neck, trying to get a look at the dead body as I pass a wreck on the highway. I really don't want to look. I know it is going to be bad. I'm just so damn curious.

I know I'm going to regret it. I'm going to wish I never looked, but I just can't help myself.

I love a good tragedy.

[Riverwind]

I know, campaign season starts it seams the day after the last election. I would love to see them pass a law that no primary can be held until June, and no advertising on TV Radio etc until 6 weeks before the election. but we live i8n the land of the free, and, and, and, can you adopt me.

River

[bobover3]

The Rasmussen poll found Obama and Romney tied a few days ago. Now a Fox poll shows Romney 2 points ahead of Obama.

I know, I know. These aren't respectable, i.e., liberal, organizations. But wait ... in December, 2011, a similar Fox poll reported that Obama would get 44%, Romney 15%, and Gingrish 16%. So Fox polls may not be biased against Obama.

As I wrote above, with primaries ending and Republicans coalescing behind Romney, the balance will change.

[A-1]

What did you say? "Romney behind? Well, yes, certainly looks that way...

Poll Date Sample Obama (D) Romney (R) Spread
RCP Average 3/20 - 4/11 -- 47.9 43.6 Obama +4.3
FOX News 4/9 - 4/11 910 RV 44 46 Romney +2
Rasmussen Tracking 4/9 - 4/11 1500 LV 45 45 Tie
ABC News/Wash Post 4/5 - 4/8 RV 51 44 Obama +7
IBD/CSM/TIPP 3/30 - 4/5 816 RV 46 38 Obama +8
USA Today/Gallup 3/25 - 3/26 901 RV 49 45 Obama +4
CNN/Opinion Research 3/24 - 3/25 925 RV 54 43 Obama +11
McClatchy/Marist 3/20 - 3/22 846 RV 46 44 Obama +2

Or, just click here...http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...bama-1171.html

I won't bother to line the damn thing up. Bob/3 reports only polls where Romney is ahead OR tied.

[Dave]

The Rasmussen poll found Obama and Romney tied a few days ago. Now a Fox poll shows Romney 2 points ahead of Obama.
I know, I know. These aren't respectable, i.e., liberal, organizations. But wait ... in December, 2011, a similar Fox poll reported that Obama would get 44%, Romney 15%, and Gingrish 16%. So Fox polls may not be biased against Obama.
As I wrote above, with primaries ending and Republicans coalescing behind Romney, the balance will change.

>>Rasmussen has some interesting quirks built into their polls. It's not that they are totally wrong. Rasmussen is biased by being one-sided
>>Not only does REAL CLEAR POLITICS report all polls,
>>Every night, DAILY KOS rounds up polls for their commentary.
>>Tonight they posted this and explain why FOX and RASMUSSEN get he results that they do...
>>

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...0-?showAll=yes

Daily Kos Elections
Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:15 PM PDT
Daily Kos Elections Polling Wrap: Obama behind! (But only if 2012 turnout looks like 2010)

by Steve Singiser...
...
...
So, Mitt Romney, having now secured the Republican nod, has moved ahead of Barack Obama in a look ahead to November, according to the Democratic-Republican polling consortium that is contracted to do surveys for Fox News.

Or ... is he? Herein lies a lesson in why sample composition matters.

One of the most reliable maxims in public opinion polling is: if the number is too good (or too bad) to be true, it probably is. Frequently, the reason a poll is either far too optimistic or too pessimistic when compared to its contemporaries is because the pool of respondents has shifted in a way that might be hard to replicate on Election Day.

This current poll by Fox News is an excellent case in point. The sample for this poll broke down thusly: D 40.6, R 39.9, I 19.5. While that is not far off what the sample composition of the 2010 midterm election exit polls looked like, finding a presidential point of comparison is pretty darned rare.

Looking back at the exit polling for the last four presidential elections, we get the following breakdowns:

2008: D 39, R 32, I 29

2004: D 37, R 37, I 26

2000: D 39, R 35, I 27

1996: D 39, R 35, I 26

So, on average, Democrats have had a net edge of roughly four points in elections. Fox News is assuming that the voting pool is going to contain far fewer independents, and far more Republicans than we have seen in a generation.

Is it possible? Possible? Sure. Republican election analysts spent the entirety of 2008 convinced that the polls were skewing Democratic, because the samples looked way too Democratic. Of course, then the D-R gap in the November exit polls was wider than it had been in over a generation.

And (pointing a finger at myself here), a number of Democrats looked at a number of polls in 2010, convinced that Democrats were being undersampled. As it happened, they were undersampled for a reason.

However, a legitimate reason to be skeptical of this Fox News poll is the fact that not only does it look different than previous election years, it also looked markedly different than the critical mass of polls conducted this year. It is pretty tough to find a poll in the last eight months or so where the sample had equivalent numbers of Democrats and Republicans.

Now, if going forward, we see a tightening in the partisan spread in samples from other pollsters, then this Fox News poll becomes prophetic rather than errant. But, until then, it is fair to be a bit skeptical about a poll that presumes an electorate that (a) doesn't look like many we've seen in recent presidential elections and (b) doesn't look like many of its polling contemporaries, either.
Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 07:15 PM PDT.